Positive relationship between risk-taking behaviour and aggression in subordinate but not dominant males of a Cuban poeciliid fish
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies of integrated phenotypes sometimes reveal correlations between mating effort, favoured by sexual selection, and risk-taking, favoured by survival selection. We used Girardinus metallicus to examine the relationship between rank order of mating effort and risk-taking. We measured risk-taking in a novel environment containing a predator. We then paired males, using aggression to assign dominant or subordinate status, and examined mating behaviour. Dominant males showed higher mating effort, but did not exhibit any relationship between risk-taking and mating effort. Subordinate males exhibited a cross-context correlation, as males were either more willing to take risks and aggressive or more hesitant to take risks and nonaggressive. Less risk-averse, aggressive subordinate males may gain fitness advantages in a more realistic dominance hierarchy, despite being outranked by the rival with which they were paired in our study. Results highlight intraspecific variation in behavioural correlations and the importance of social environment in shaping integrated phenotypes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it